Illegal market is suspected of funding attacks on legal betting operators in Brazil

Regulated operators in Brazil say the wave of criticism against sports betting and online gaming looks patterned, not random: the same arguments keep coming back, the same studies get recycled, and the social media promotion behind them points to diffuse funding sources. For PSPs and acquirers, the issue is simple enough: if the illegal market is helping shape the narrative, regulation is not just a policy question but a direct competitive threat.

1. According to an unnamed source linked to legal betting operators, players in Brazil’s regulated market have identified signs that some of the anti-betting content and boosted social media campaigns may originate in the illegal market. The mechanism described includes both clandestine companies and intermediaries operating formally in other sectors, which would be sponsoring attacks on licensed platforms.
2. The source told BNLData: “We are concerned about the possibility that groups linked to the illegal market, probably the Chinese one, which still has great relevance and scale in Brazil, are behind these moves.” The stated objective, the source said, would be to make legalization unworkable so that a return to illegality would stop the enforcement actions now being implemented.
3. The sector’s suspicion is tied to market data. A study by Instituto Esfera, published in February 2026, estimates that the illegal market already accounts for 41% to 51% of online betting in Brazil, moving between R$ 26 billion and R$ 40 billion per year. In other words, this is not a fringe channel; it is a market large enough to care about regulation as a commercial problem.
4. International reports cited in the text say the so-called “Greater China” may concentrate almost half of global illegal betting volume, with structured operations based in countries such as the Philippines, Cambodia, Myanmar, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam. The common thread is limited state control, which gives fraud and money laundering schemes room to operate.
5. In Brazil, this network has already earned a nickname: “Chinese bets.” The scheme uses third-party CPF numbers, the so-called laranjas (strawmen), to simulate lawful registration in the Ministry of Finance system and create the appearance of compliant operations that are, in practice, illegal.

For high-risk payment providers, the key point is not the politics of betting ads. It is that Brazil’s regulated market is fighting on two fronts at once: for consumer trust and against a shadow industry that, according to operators, may be trying to keep the legal channel weak enough to survive.